Evaluation of the single medial circummuscular perforator DIEP flap: Outcomes and comparison to traditional transmuscular single perforator flap

"Spin" in Observational Studies in Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is widely used in autologous breast reconstruction. However, the technique relies heavily on nonrandomized observational research, which has been found to have high risk of bias. "Spin" can be used to inappropriately present study findings to exaggerate benefits or minimize harms. The primary objective was to assess the prevalence of spin in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. The secondary objectives were to determine the prevalence of each spin category and strategy.

Methods

MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from January 1, 2015, to November 15, 2022. Spin was assessed in abstracts and full-texts of included studies according to criteria proposed by Lazarus et al.

Results

There were 77 studies included for review. The overall prevalence of spin was 87.0%. Studies used a median of two spin strategies (interquartile range: 1-3). The most common strategies identified were causal language or claims (n = 41/77, 53.2%), inadequate extrapolation to larger population, intervention, or outcome (n = 27/77, 35.1%), inadequate implication for clinical practice (n = 25/77, 32.5%), use of linguistic spin (n = 22/77, 28.6%), and no consideration of the limitations (n = 21/77, 27.3%). There were no significant associations between selected study characteristics and the presence of spin.

Conclusions

The prevalence of spin is high in nonrandomized observational studies on DIEP reconstruction. Causal language or claims are the most common strategy. Investigators, reviewers, and readers should familiarize themselves with spin strategies to avoid misinterpretation of research in DIEP reconstruction.

The ideal scenario in deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap dissection: a complete muscle and nerve-sparing approach

The deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP) has become the gold standard method of autologous breast reconstruction by simultaneously maximising aesthetics of the breasts and abdomen, and maximising the function of the abdominal wall. While the anatomical variability of the DIEP flap perforators have been well characterised, there has been less attention paid to the hierarchy of DIEP perforators in terms of limiting abdominal dysfunction post-operatively. In this paper, we seek to draw attention to what is, in our opinion, the ideal scenario in DIEP flap harvest. Where present, a medial paramuscular cutaneous vessel (MPCV) may be harvested using the pyramidalis separation technique enabling a complete rectus abdominis muscle-sparing and abdominal motor nerve-sparing approach. Herein, we describe the pyramidalis separation technique and the results in representative cases. In our experience, this technique enables an expeditious surgical procedure, and dramatically reduces damage to both muscles and nerves.

Level of evidence: Level V, therapeutic study

Necrosis or Flap Loss After Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Reconstruction: Impact of Perforators and Recipient Vessels

Background The aim of this study is to analyze the impact of the number and location of perforators harvested and the recipient vessels used on deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap survival and the occurrence of flap necrosis requiring re-operation.

Patients and Methods Four hundred and seventy-one DIEP flap reconstructions, performed between January 2008 and December 2019, were retrospectively analyzed.

Results Flap necrosis requiring re-operation was observed in 40 (9%) of flaps and total flap loss rate was 1% (n = 6). No significant differences were observed between internal mammary vessels (IMV, n = 287, 61%) and thoracodorsal vessels (TDV, n = 184, 39%) regarding postoperative re-anastomosis (p = 0.529) or flap survival (p = 0.646). Intraoperative conversion from IMV to TDV was performed on 64 (14%) patients. TDV were more commonly associated with problems in preparation of the vessels than IMV (p < 0.001). Second vein anastomosis was performed on 18 (4%) patients. In total, 81 flaps (17%) had one perforator, 165 (35%) had two, 218 (46%) had three to five, and 7 (2%) had more than five perforators. Flaps with three to five perforators were more commonly associated with flap necrosis (p < 0.001) than flaps with one or two perforators. Independent factors associated with necrosis were body mass index (BMI) > 30 (odds ratio [OR]: 2.28; 95% confidence interval: 1.06–4.91, p = 0.035) and perforator/s located on the lateral row (OR: 3.08, 95% CI 1.29–7.33, p = 0.011).

Conclusion We conclude that the occurrence of flap necrosis requiring re-operation may be higher in DIEP flaps with more than two perforators or perforator/s located on the lateral row and in obese patients. Neither the recipient vessels used nor the number of perforators harvested had any impact on the flap survival rate.